J&K High Court Permits Termination of 15-Year-Old Rape Victim's Pregnancy Beyond 24-Week MTP Act Limit

Justice Sanjay Parihar issued a writ of mandamus directing the UT of J&K to immediately terminate a 15-year-old POCSO victim's pregnancy, which had crossed 24 weeks, overriding the statutory ceiling on constitutional grounds.

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar on 9 September 2026 allowed a writ petition filed by a 15-year-old rape victim, granting her immediate permission to undergo medical termination of a pregnancy that had advanced to approximately 24–26 weeks of gestation — at or beyond the ceiling prescribed under the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971. Justice Sanjay Parihar, sitting singly, issued a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to take all necessary steps for the procedure forthwith at Government Medical College, Baramulla, without awaiting any further order. The court held that compelling a minor victim of sexual assault to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term would breach her constitutional rights and compound the trauma she had already endured.

The Assault, the FIR, and the Writ Petition

FIR No. 90/2026, dated 31 August 2026, was registered with Police Station Uri against an accused who has since been found to be a juvenile. The victim, aged 15 at the time of the incident, was found to be pregnant during the course of investigation. The Investigating Officer, SHO Mohammad Iqbal of Police Station Uri (belt no. 109315/ARP), appeared before the court through virtual mode and confirmed that the victim had already been examined under Section 183 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.

The investigating officer further submitted a report dated 10 September 2026 stating that the statement of the victim recorded under Section 183 BNSS disclosed offences under Sections 3 and 4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. An application was separately moved before the Juvenile Justice Board seeking permission to collect DNA samples of both the victim and the accused. The victim's clothes were seized in the presence of a lady doctor at SDH Uri, sealed before an Executive Magistrate 1st Class, Uri, and transmitted to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Srinagar.

The victim, being a child in need of care and protection, was produced before the Child Welfare Committee, Baramulla. The Committee counselled her and her family on the need for urgent medical attention and appropriate legal and psychological support. Her father, Abdul Rashid, thereafter approached the High Court on her behalf by way of the present writ petition seeking immediate permission for medical termination of pregnancy.

The Medical Board's Opinion and the Statutory Threshold

To assist the court in arriving at an informed decision, the respondents were directed to constitute a Medical Board for examination of the victim. The Board, comprising nine specialists, examined her on 8 September 2026. It recorded that she was “conscious and oriented” and that “fetal heart sounds were present and regular.” It opined that the pregnancy could be terminated, subject to transfusion of two to three units of packed red blood cells as clinically indicated, and subject to the procedure being performed at an appropriately equipped tertiary-care facility under specialist supervision, with adequate blood products and all necessary precautions in place. The Board did not opine that termination would pose a risk to the victim's life or health sufficient to preclude the procedure.

The uterine size recorded by the Medical Board corresponded to approximately 24–26 weeks of gestation. This placed the pregnancy at or beyond the outer limit set by Rule 3-B of the Medical Termination of Pregnancy Rules, 2003, which permits termination up to twenty-four weeks for specified categories of women, including survivors of sexual assault, rape or incest, and minors. The court set out Rule 3-B in full, observing that while the victim fell squarely within the eligible categories, the gestational age had either reached or crossed the statutory threshold prescribed for those categories.

The central question before the court was therefore whether, in these specific facts and circumstances, it could permit medical termination notwithstanding the pregnancy having crossed twenty-four weeks.

Constitutional Remedy Where the Statute Falls Short

Counsel for the petitioner, Ms. Asifa Rashid, relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in S v. Union of India, SLP No. 14454/2026, decided on 24 April 2026. The Supreme Court had held in that case that no court ought to compel a woman, much less a minor child, to carry a pregnancy to its full term against her express wishes, and that such compulsion would negate her decisional autonomy and expose her to grave trauma.

In paragraph 11.3 of that judgment, the Supreme Court addressed precisely the situation where a pregnancy has crossed the statutory period under the MTP Act: S v. Union of India held that “a lack of remedy under a statute does not bar a constitutional remedy” and that constitutional courts must weigh all facts and circumstances from the lens of the party who intends to terminate the pregnancy and is willing to undertake the medical risk, rather than compelling her to complete the pregnancy term and give birth to an unwanted child.

Justice Parihar also drew on a co-ordinate bench decision of this court in Ms. X (Minor) v. Union Territory of J&K and others, WP(C) No. 527/2023, in which permission was granted for termination of a minor victim's pregnancy that had advanced to approximately thirty weeks. That bench had observed that various High Courts and the Supreme Court had permitted termination beyond twenty-four weeks on the basis that a woman, whether married or unmarried, has a right to be rid of an unwanted pregnancy, even where the statute does not expressly provide for it.

Applying these principles, Justice Parihar held that compelling the minor victim to carry to term a pregnancy allegedly resulting from the sexual assault would inevitably aggravate the physical and psychological trauma she had already suffered and may expose her to social stigma and its attendant consequences. The victim had unequivocally expressed her unwillingness to continue with the pregnancy. The Medical Board had found termination to be medically feasible subject to the stipulated safeguards. Denial of the relief sought in these circumstances would, in the court's view, amount to compelling the minor to endure the consequences of the alleged sexual assault for the remainder of the pregnancy and potentially for years thereafter.

The court also noted the time-sensitivity of the matter. Any further delay would result in further advancement of gestational age, adding to both the medical complexities and the psychological distress of the minor victim. The matter was held to admit of no avoidable delay.

Directions on Forensic Evidence, Confidentiality, and Costs

Justice Parihar issued a series of ancillary directions alongside the primary writ of mandamus. Having regard to the pendency of the criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No. 90/2026, the respondents were directed to ensure that foetal tissue and material be preserved, properly collected, sealed, and transmitted to the competent forensic laboratory in accordance with law and the requirements of the investigating agency, for the purpose of DNA analysis and other forensic examination.

On identity protection, the court directed strict confidentiality at all stages: no information capable of identifying the victim was to be disclosed except to those strictly necessary for her treatment, for investigation of the case, or pursuant to any requirement of law.

The court also directed that all medical expenses connected with the termination, including preparatory treatment and post-procedure care, be borne by the respondents in accordance with law and the Medical Board's recommendations.

The procedure was directed to be undertaken at Government Medical College, Baramulla, which the court was informed is equipped with the requisite tertiary-care facilities. Should the treating specialists consider referral to a higher centre necessary for the safety of the minor victim, the respondents were directed to arrange such referral and transportation forthwith without requiring any further order from the court.

The petitioner was to be permitted to remain accompanied by her mother and/or lawful guardian, subject to applicable medical protocol, and was to be provided appropriate psychological support and counselling before and after the procedure, as recommended by the Medical Board.

Order

WP (C) 2211/2026 was allowed and disposed of on 9 September 2026. A writ of mandamus was issued directing the respondents to forthwith take all necessary steps for medical termination of the pregnancy of the minor victim in FIR No. 90/2026 dated 31 August 2026, registered at Police Station Uri, notwithstanding that the gestational age had crossed the limit of twenty-four weeks prescribed under the MTP Act read with the Rules. The Principal/Medical Superintendent of Associated Hospital, Government Medical College, Baramulla, was directed to ensure the procedure was undertaken at the earliest, subject to medical fitness as assessed by the treating specialists and strictly in accordance with the Medical Board's recommendations and precautions. All directions were to be acted upon forthwith and without avoidable delay.